Skip to main content
. 2017 Aug 24;7:9273. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-09548-9

Table 2.

Genetic impact of TM6SF2 E167K polymorphism on hepatic histological features in the selected studies.

First author, publication year, study, [Reference Values for Arterial Stiffness, #2467] Subgroup Histological feature Scoring system [Reference Values for Arterial Stiffness, #2467] Numbera: (N) Comparisonb Statistics OR(95% CI) P-value Adjustment
N. Coppola, 201519 None Steatosis NAS24 S0/S1/S2/S3: EE:45/69/6/10 EK + KK:2/10/2/4 S2 + S3 vs. S0 + S1 Chi-square 3.56 (1.17–10.8) 0.02 None
None Fibrosis Ishak25 F0/F1/F2/F3/F4/F5/F6: EE:3/40/35/29/14/7/2 EK + KK:2/5/3/3/3/1/1 F4-F6 vs. F0-F3 Chi-square 1.79 (0.58–5.51) 0.31 None
M. Milano, 2015, Milan cohort20 None Steatosis Ishak25 S0/S1/S2/S3: EE:240/383/87/36 EK + KK:15/36/11/7 S2 + S3 vs. S0 + S1 Chi-square 1.79 (1.01–3.16) 0.04 None
Genotype3 CHC Steatosis Ishak25 NA S(X + 1) vs. S(X)c Ordinal regression 1.23 (0.60–2.52) 0.58 Age, gender, BMI, HCV G3,diabetes, alcohol intake, PNPLA3 I148M
Genotype (1 + 2 + 4) CHC Steatosis Ishak25 NA S(X + 1) vs. S(X) Ordinal regression 1.33 (1.03–1.72) 0.03 Age, gender, BMI, diabetes, alcohol intake, PNPLA3 I148M
None Inflamma tion Ishak25 G0-G2/G3-G4/G5-G6/ G7-G8/G9-G10/G11-G12 /G13-G18: EE:26/105/262/209/92/ 39/13 EK + KK: 0/17/26/13/5/4/4 G(X + 1) vs. G(X)d Ordinal regression 1.27 (1.02–2.59) 0.04 Age, gender, BMI, HCV G3, diabetes, alcohol intake, ancestry, PNPLA3 I148M
None Fibrosis Ishak25 F0/F1/F2/F3/F4/F5/F6: EE:12/118/201/154/71/60/130 F6 vs. F1-F5 Logistic regression 2.19 (1.18–3.39) 0.01 Age, gender, BMI, HCV G3, diabetes, alcohol intake, ancestry, PNPLA3 I148M
None Fibrosis Ishak25 EK + KK: 0/9/18/10/9/2/21 F(X + 1) vs. F(X)e Ordinal regression 1.23 (0.99–1.53) 0.06 Age, gender, BMI, HCV G3, diabetes, alcohol intake, ancestry, PNPLA3 I148M
M. Milano, 2015, validation cohort20 None Fibrosis METAVIR27 NA F2-F4 vs. F0-F1 Logistic regression 1.81 (1.02–3.04) 0.02 Age and gender
S. Petta, 201522 None Steatosis NAS24 S0/S1/S2: EE:356/187/107 EK + KK:21/14/9 S(X + 1) vs. S(X) Ordinal regression 1.48 (0.82–2.69) 0.19 Age, gender, BMI, HOMA-IR
None Inflamma tion Scheuer26 G4/G0 + G1 + G2 + G3: EE: 285/365 EK + KK: 17/27 G4 vs. G0-G3 Chi-square 0.81 (0.43–1.51) 0.50 None
None Fibrosis Scheuer26 F0-F2/F3-F4: EE:449/201 EK + KK:33/11 F3-F4 vs. F0-F2 Logistic regression 0.75 (0.34–1.63) 0.47 Age, gender, BMI, HOMA-IR, PNPLA3 I148M, and IL-28B rs12979860
M. Eslam, 201621 None Steatosis NAS24 S0/S1/S2/S3 EE:922/533/237/86 EK:100/94/22/19 KK:2/4/3/1 S2 + S3 vs. S0 + S1 Logistic regression 1.14 (1.02–1.27) 0.01 Age, gender, BMI, HOMA-IR, HCV genotype, alcohol intake, and PNPLA3 I148M
Genotype3 CHC Steatosis NAS24 NA S(X + 1) vs. S(X) Ordinal regression 1.05 (0.99–1.08) 0.50 Age, gender, BMI, HOMA-IR, and PNPLA3 I148M
Genotype (1 + 2 + 4) CHC Steatosis NAS24 NA S(X + 1) vs. S(X) Ordinal regression 1.12 (1.11–1.13) 0.04 Age, gender, BMI, HOMA-IR, and PNPLA3 I148M
None Inflamma tion METAVIR27 G0/G1/G2/G3 EE:75/889/620/194 EK:11/129/74/21 KK:1/1/6/2 G(X + 1) vs. G(X) Ordinal regression 1.04 (0.85–1.26) 0.10 Age, gender, steatosis, HOMA-IR, BMI, HCV genotype,alcohol intake, and PNPLA3 I148M
None Fibrosis METAVIR27 F0/F1/F2/F3/F4 EE:232/630/512/248 /156 EK:36/87/60/22/30 KK:1/3/0/5/1 F2-F4 vs. F0-F1 Logistic regression 1.39 (1.04–1.87) 0.02 Age, gender, steatosis, HOMA-IR, BMI, HCV genotype, alcohol intake, and PNPLA3 I148M
F4 vs. F0-F3 Logistic regression 1.82 (1.01–3.28) 0.01 Age, gender, steatosis, HOMA-IR, BMI, HCV genotype, alcohol intake, and PNPLA3 I148M
F(X + 1) vs. F(X) Ordinal regression 1.07 (1.01–1.14) 0.04 Age, gender, steatosis, HOMA-IR, BMI, HCV genotype, alcohol intake, and PNPLA3 I148M

aS, G and F respectively represent the histological severity on steatosis, inflammation and fibrosis; b TM6SF2 E167K variant is coded in dominant genetic model (EE/EK + KK) for each comparison; cS(X + 1) vs.S(X) means the continuous comparison between subgroups with adjacent advanced and mild steatosis; dG(X + 1) vs.G(X) means the continuous comparison between subgroups with adjacent advanced and mild inflammation; eF(X + 1) vs.F(X) means the continuous comparison between subgroups with adjacent advanced and mild fibrosis.